FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

supercreative · 05-03-2020 10:05PM

Does anyone have a decent one- or two-line summary of Zalewski? I've read a couple of newspaper articles on it but really don't understand how it changes anything from Cahill v Sutton. Would be much appreciated!

TCPIP · 05-03-2020 10:13PM

supercreative wrote: »

Does anyone have a decent one- or two-line summary of Zalewski? I've read a couple of newspaper articles on it but really don't understand how it changes anything from Cahill v Sutton. Would be much appreciated!

It doesn't change, it strengthens. The rationale of the defence [and the HC] would be that by allowing him a fresh hearing with a new AO that he would no longer need to carry on with the constitutional challenge as his rights have been upheld but his argument was that there was nothing preventing the same thing happening again while the Act stood as it does.

user115 · 05-03-2020 10:21PM

supercreative wrote: »

Does anyone have a decent one- or two-line summary of Zalewski? I've read a couple of newspaper articles on it but really don't understand how it changes anything from Cahill v Sutton. Would be much appreciated!

WRC decided to quash the decision of the adjudication officer for an "admin error" but it was actually significant enough. When it would be quashed it would be remitted for hearing to the same system again that he felt was in breach of his constitutional rights. The fact the decision was quashed HC tried to rule since the error no longer effected him then he was not allowed challenge it because it no longer existed. But the error really was the whole system and that did not change just because a decision was quashed and remitted.

scooby321 · 05-03-2020 10:51PM

iamanengine wrote: »

Kerins/O'Brien - Privilege to comments made in either House of the Oireachtas, they are non-justiciable unless there is a particularly egregious attack on a person's rights as in Kerins. Also their internal rules are non-justiciable again unless there is an attack on constitutional rights as in Callely

Cityview Test - Non delegation doctrine, the Oireachtas can delegate some power to Ministers provided the principle Act lays down sufficient principles and policies such that the Minister is merely implementing the Act rather than law-making

That is off the top of my head so I could be wrong, if anyone wants to chip in fire away

You're definitely right with this. I just got mixed up and muddled non-delegation in with Kerins' committee of investigation. stupid mistake and just paranoid I'll do it again. Especially as trying to cram 16 topics (only 3 of which I managed so far)

Hamerzan Sickles · 05-03-2020 11:21PM

iamanengine wrote: »

Some of the big 2019 cases -

Kerins v McGuinness - Oireachtas
Zalewski v Minister for Justice and Equality - Locus Standi
Sweeney Ireland - Right to Silence
Shatter v Guerin - Fair Procedure
AC v Cork University Hospital - Liberty

I was actually covering all of these except for Sweeney. Great minds think alike iamanengine. If anyone has notes on Sweeney and wants to PM them to me, be my guest.

If I get lucky with this paper tomorrow I might actually pull this off.

TCPIP · 06-03-2020 12:15AM

To everyone doing Constitutional

https://youtu.be/8wwtbQXTugo?t=148

iamanengine · 06-03-2020 12:41AM

I'm calling it quits lads, brain can't do anymore. Need a relatively decent nights sleep or won't be able to function at the exam!

Good luck, see y'all on the other side

Edit - Haven’t quite gone yet, if someone gets a chance could they very briefly explain AC v Cork University Hospital to me?

My notes seem to say that the SC overturned the CoA, and that the first detention was unlawful but then 2nd detention after the wardship was granted was lawful? But yet it says that the granting of the wardship was unlawful?

If anyone could clear that up for me I would love you forever

godfather2 · 06-03-2020 09:20AM

iamanengine wrote: »

I'm calling it quits lads, brain can't do anymore. Need a relatively decent nights sleep or won't be able to function at the exam!

Good luck, see y'all on the other side

Edit - Haven’t quite gone yet, if someone gets a chance could they very briefly explain AC v Cork University Hospital to me?

My notes seem to say that the SC overturned the CoA, and that the first detention was unlawful but then 2nd detention after the wardship was granted was lawful? But yet it says that the granting of the wardship was unlawful?

If anyone could clear that up for me I would love you forever

Criticised the wardship due to short period of time before hearing, lack of representation and non availability of legal aid in such instances.
Should have been an independent party to look out for her interests. Just because a ward of court or lacking in capacity does not mean you have no constitutional rights. Her fair procedure right not vindicated. Application flawed as a result.
Very much ad libbed above.

rightytighty · 06-03-2020 09:57AM

Good luck to all for constitutional!

isawitfirst · 06-03-2020 11:35AM

can anyone explain what the law is regarding successive squatter's and adverse possession?

lawgirl23 · 06-03-2020 11:45AM

Quick question - sat criminal yesterday, thought it went okay. Had a look at the exam paper this morning and realised I answered the two four-part questions asking you to advise the DPP on charges to be brought, but instead of advising the DPP, I advised the client. Cardinal sin of not reading the question, I know, but I'm wondering if it will exclude me from getting any marks in those questions or if I'll be given marks for the information and then penalised because I advised the wrong person? Thanks!

mydogwentroof · 06-03-2020 11:53AM

lawgirl23 wrote: »

Quick question - sat criminal yesterday, thought it went okay. Had a look at the exam paper this morning and realised I answered the two four-part questions asking you to advise the DPP on charges to be brought, but instead of advising the DPP, I advised the client. Cardinal sin of not reading the question, I know, but I'm wondering if it will exclude me from getting any marks in those questions or if I'll be given marks for the information and then penalised because I advised the wrong person? Thanks!

You might lose a mark or two - once you identified the correct law I'd imagine you'll be ok

iamanengine · 06-03-2020 01:47PM

godfather2 wrote: »

Criticised the wardship due to short period of time before hearing, lack of representation and non availability of legal aid in such instances.
Should have been an independent party to look out for her interests. Just because a ward of court or lacking in capacity does not mean you have no constitutional rights. Her fair procedure right not vindicated. Application flawed as a result.
Very much ad libbed above.

Didn’t need it in the end, but I will honour my promise to love you forever

rightytighty · 06-03-2020 01:47PM

How was it? What came up?

iamanengine · 06-03-2020 01:57PM

rightytighty wrote: »

How was it? What came up?

1. Case note - I had Shatter v Guerin and McCrystal which was lovely
2. Non-Delegation, kind of tricky, was on the difference between Leontjava and O’Sullivan, Domestic v EU
3. Not sure what this was, maybe Equality?
4. Again not sure, effects of unconstitutionality/remedies or something
5. Kerins, Oireachtas, Non justiciability
6. Family
7. Admin of justice in public
8. absolutely no idea

I was lucky to get 5 but happy with the 5 I got though they were a little tricky

rightytighty · 06-03-2020 02:00PM

iamanengine wrote: »

1. Case note - I had Shatter v Guerin and McCrystal which was lovely
2. Non-Delegation, kind of tricky, was on the difference between Leontjava and O’Sullivan, Domestic v EU
3. Not sure what this was, maybe Equality?
4. Again not sure, effects of unconstitutionality/remedies or something
5. Kerins, Oireachtas, Non justiciability
6. Family
7. Admin of justice in public
8. absolutely no idea

I was lucky to get 5 but happy with the 5 I got though they were a little tricky

Nice, well done to those who called case note cases. Looks like a fair enough paper. Kerins finally appeared!

CiaranS93 · 06-03-2020 02:02PM

iamanengine wrote: »

1. Case note - I had Shatter v Guerin and McCrystal which was lovely
2. Non-Delegation, kind of tricky, was on the difference between Leontjava and O’Sullivan, Domestic v EU
3. Not sure what this was, maybe Equality?
4. Again not sure, effects of unconstitutionality/remedies or something
5. Kerins, Oireachtas, Non justiciability
6. Family
7. Admin of justice in public
8. absolutely no idea

I was lucky to get 5 but happy with the 5 I got though they were a little tricky

I think/hope 3 was locus standi and property rights but could be completely wrong

8 was SOP judiciary: Buckley v AG Sinn Fein Funds act is the main case I used

Law1997 · 06-03-2020 02:07PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

I think/hope 3 was locus standi and property rights but could be completely wrong

8 was SOP judiciary: Buckley v AG Sinn Fein Funds act is the main case I used

I answered 3 on locus standi and property too

Law1997 · 06-03-2020 02:08PM

Guys is it ok to do the case note q in constitutional like focus on the significance of the case but talk about other cases too?

Legal case · 06-03-2020 02:09PM

Hi does anyone have an up to date exam grid for Equity & Contract at this very late stage? Please. Only have exam reports up to spring 2019.

CiaranS93 · 06-03-2020 02:09PM

Law1997 wrote: »

I answered 3 on locus standi and property too

Thank god! I started with equality then realised commercial entity can't invoke it and it's only to do with "facet of human personality" which quickly made me scratch it out haha

channing90 · 06-03-2020 02:10PM

Legal case wrote: »

Hi does anyone have an up to date exam grid for Equity & Contract at this very late stage? Please.

I have equity, what’s your email

CiaranS93 · 06-03-2020 02:11PM

Legal case wrote: »

Hi does anyone have an up to date exam grid for Equity & Contract at this very late stage? Please. Only have exam reports up to spring 2019.

I have contract send your email

iamanengine · 06-03-2020 02:13PM

Very very almost answered 3 on Equality!! Ended up doing the Family one instead so a lucky escape there for sure

Fair play to those who spotted, I actually knew Locus Standi fairly well which is unfortunate but shouldn't hold me back from a pass I think

CiaranS93 · 06-03-2020 02:14PM

iamanengine wrote: »

Very very almost answered 3 on Equality!! Ended up doing the Family one instead so a lucky escape there for sure

Fair play to those who spotted, I actually knew Locus Standi fairly well which is unfortunate but shouldn't hold me back from a pass I think

I might have spotted it but don't think it will get me across the line unfortunately haha

nmurphy1441 · 06-03-2020 02:14PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

I have contract send your email

Can you send it to me too please? It’s the only one I’m missing, can’t find my copy anywhere!

CiaranS93 · 06-03-2020 02:16PM

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Can you send it to me too please? It’s the only one I’m missing, can’t find my copy anywhere!

Yea inbox me your email address. It doesn't have October 19. But offer and acceptance didn't come up if that helps

iamanengine · 06-03-2020 02:24PM

Anyone doing Equity and Company?

How are you managing your time?

I'm thinking of studying company today, equity next two days and then company after the equity exam?

Captainsatnav · 06-03-2020 02:29PM

I'm just reading over a few posts on this thread and I just want to wish every person who contributes the very best. The questions and feelings and doubts you're having - I had the exact same when I was doing the blasted things from 2008 - 2011. Best Wishes, M

bobbyness · 06-03-2020 02:32PM

Captainsatnav wrote: »

I'm just reading over a few posts on this thread and I just want to wish every person who contributes the very best. The questions and feelings and doubts you're having - I had the exact same when I was doing the blasted things from 2008 - 2011. Best Wishes, M

Aaaawwww. Hit me right in the feels!

FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

Comments